Just finished watching the movie and loved it. Bravo mr Afllect. Even as a super liberal who credited Carter not Reagan , just like people crediting Obama not bush for the operation that ended up killing OBL, my hat still goes to you for a suberb movie about a superb operation.
Canada? Someone said that US was a country blessed my god. No kidding, god gave the USA the best Neighborg it could've hoped for. Thanks Canada!

Emma - take a look at Hollywood rewriting history, and actually INSULTING those who help them. There was even a movie (not a success) where the Americans won the battle of Britain !!!! Then theres the movie U571 for starters. NOT Americans but the Royal Navy. This movie insults the British and New Zealand embassies who actually assisted, NOT refuse. And look how the yanks say thank you.
What next ? Oh they win the Vietnam War, and Julius Ceasar was from the Bronx. No wonder their reputation is getting lower yearly world wide

Firstly, I acknowledge the financial, materiel and logistic support the USA provided Europe in both world wars. I also have the greatest respect for the courage of their fighting men, and the sacrifice that they made in Europe and other theatres. Their contribution was vital, and I thank them for that unreservedly.
The American Military and Diplomatic Service have plenty of heroic acts that Hollywood could portray as factually "loosely" as they like, without insulting, belittling and patronizing the countries that served alongside.
BUT:
The Enigma Machine was retrieved by the British and cracked by British and Polish cryptologists, not the Americans at all, as in U571.
D-Day was not wholly an American operation, as in Saving Private Ryan.
The Liberation of Western Europe was not wholly an American operation, as in Band of Brothers.
The Burma Campaign was not won single-handedly by the 3,000 odd men of Merrill's Marauders.
The Battle of Britain was not won single-handedly by Billy Fiske.
and of course, Hollywood couldn't let the truth of Argo get in the way of a good story of American ingenuity, either.
It's notable how Hollywood will only associate itself with heroic action. You will never see a Hollywood blockbuster about the American Medical Unit using human guinea pigs, with Tom Cruise as the handsome, but driven, torturing, Dr Mengele.
Also, can you imagine the outrage if The Sands of Iwo Jima were to be remade in the UK, starring Daniel Craig as a tough as nails Sergeant in the Black Watch, witnessing the raising of the Saltire on Mount Suribachi by men in kilts?

No secret, it's just that I do not know every detail of all the history of the world, and however hard I try I doubt I ever will. I was careful to credit the Americans in my first and second paragraphs (this would certainly count as an heroic act that Hollywood could portray as factually "loosely" as they like'). I congratulate the Americans for this achievement, and eagerly await Hollywood's factually accurate (with acceptable poetic license) dramatisation.

However, the topic is Hollywood misrepresenting history to America's benefit. Please tell me which film, made anywhere in the world, credits another nation with cracking the specific Japanese codes you mention. I will gladly protest with you that American gallantry in this instance should not be misrepresented.

If the cracking of the codes is just a mere "detail", than why even bother mentioning the Enigma?
However we all know that cracking the codes of the Germans and Japanese is not a mere detail but was of vital importance in winning the war.
For some reason the American achievment in cracking the Japanese codes did not even come to your mind while the Enigma did.
Perhaps this has something to do with the fact that there is no end to the bragging of how the British cracked the Enigma while there is no equivalent bragging about the equally brilliant American achievment in cracking the Japanese codes.
What other facts are just mere "details" that don't come to mind? Do you know what percentage of allied troops in Europe were British? American? You may not like the answer.

Sorry if my use of the word "detail" offended you. That was not my intention. Nor was it my intention to belittle the USA's contribution to both world wars, or their cryptographers. The reason I mention Enigma is precisely because the historical facts are so well known, yet Hollywood was still able to make and release a film starring Harvey Keitel and Jon Bon Jovi as US Navy personnel who boarded U571 in the North Atlantic and recovered an Enigma machine in 1942. Let's compare that precis with the facts: Royal Navy personnel from HMS Bulldog recovered an Enigma machine from U110 in the North Atlantic in 1941. U571 was sunk off Ireland, by the RAAF in 1944.

I cannot explain why Hollywood chose to claim Enigma for the US Navy, (that was discussed in parliament as an affront to the Royal Navy) when they could have easily got their basic facts right and still had a cracking film. Nor can I answer why Hollywood chose not to make a film about the US Navy and cryptographers in the Pacific, so that we might discuss the accuracy of that film.

There is nothing sinister or deliberate about my not mentioning US cracKing of Japanese code: I just don't know about it. Could you recommend a book, or link?

Hollywood is entertainment. I suggest you rely on other sources for historical facts. I hear there are some well researched and documentated historical books about WW2 by prominenant historians.

Given the lack of American bragging about cracking the Japanese codes, Hollywood is probably unaware of it.

Unlike the British who have spent a great deal of time loudly advertising how they cracked the Enigma with countless books, I do not know of any book about the USA's cracking of the Japanese codes but you can easily google this info on the internet.

Cool. It's precisely because I don't rely on Hollywood that I know that U571 is a fairy tale *presented as fact*. The reason the Enigma machine is so historically important is it's association with Alan Turing and computer science. Perhaps the sequel (U572) would have been how Steve Jobs & Bill Gates designed a machine to derive the keys from Enigma coded transmissions, that would contribute to the design of the first computers.

There are many people who would believe that as fact, since people tend to believe what they see & hear, not what they read, a

So if Hollywood is just entertainment, are you seriously proposing that you and the USMC would not raise any objection to The Sands of Iwo Jima starring The Black Watch, as above. Perhaps if you did complain I could point out that "the Americans were always bragging about successfully assaulting a hill, and didn't they know that the British had been doing that since before the Stone Age"

But I wouldn't. On the whole, I like and respect the Americans too much for that.

You are of course aware that the colonials from Australia, New Zealand and Canada have the same grudges towards the Brtish for hogging all the glory and giving short thrift to the contributions of colonial troops?

I don't believe British movies have done a fair job of acknowledging the contributions of colonial troops while they have glorified the British, very deservingly so. There is no question about the heroism of British troops but you get my point.

Possibly, but as an Australian who went to school in England, I can't say that I noticed, or felt any slight.

In school, Saturday morning movies and comic books the presence of Imperial /Commonwealth Allies was always acknowledged. The Canadians & ANZACs in Flanders, ANZACS at Gallipoli in WW1. The Australians in Europe, N. Africa, Malaya, Canadians in Europe. The *RAAF* sunk U571 off Ireland. Every British schoolboy wanted to be a rinky dink digger in Tobruk at playtime. I can forgive the British for overlooking Sandakan and Kokoda, whilst acknowledging Bataan. Who could forget Overlord? 40% US, and most people would remember British, Canadian ANZAC, but Free French, Polish, Norwegians and Belgians? Then there were the South Africans and Indians in Flanders, Indians in Burma.... Need I go on? The US and other Allies were also given their due. We knew about Midway, The Coral Sea, Guadalcanal, Iwo Jima, Pearl Harbour...... And the East Africans, and the San, and Uncle Joe in the East, and the Chinese, alone, or under Indian or US command. We also knew that Polish, French, Canadian, Australian, and American nationals served with the RAF in June 1940.

I'm sure you'll understand that I don't presume to present that as a full, definitive list, just an awareness that the UK and Australia value and respect their allies. You are right that authors are often blind to their faults, and glorify their own before others, and may neglect to give their allies full recognition.

Perhaps you know about the contribution Australia, and other Allies, made in Vietnam, Desert Storm 1 & 2, Afghanistan.

I'm sure you'll agree that lack of recognition or glory is different to deliberately falsifying the facts, to claim someone else's glory as your own.

How about Daniel Day-Lewis as Biffa Aldrin, and Colin Firth as Nelly Armstrong, the plucky Brits, in Boadicea 11, "one small golf course for for man .... ", "Oh look, there's a glacier", "Nah geezer, that's Sala Uinia, ain't it, we played that la Paz in the Champions League"

I hope it feels to you that we are family (I know, Sister Sledge were corny on release), Like having a sibling who's older, richer and stronger, we argue like hell, but look out for each other when threatened by outsiders...... Even though we often think the other members of our family are insane!

I experience more hostility from Americans than from citizens of any other former Imperial territories, even the Irish, but I don't understand why.

We still have more in common than most, so why not try to help each other as friends?..... Pretty please?

We shall not be so rude as to mention that the USA has a much lower favorability rating in Britain or Australia. Nor shall we mention the gratuitious anti-Americanism of the left in Britain and Australia

Also I can give a long list of American movies that acknowledge the contributions of the British, Australians and othe allies.

Does the "Bridge over the River Kwai" ring a bell? It was one of the most famous WW2 Hollywood movies of all times, winning an oscar for best picture. The British troops were front and center in that movie.

Just last night I was watching an American movie "Company of heros" and it had British and Russian soliders helping the Americans.

You see if the Americans make 100 WW2 movies and 99 of them acknowledged the allies, you will only remember the 1 movie that didn't acknowledge the allies.

It seems that you're determined to talk about what I haven't said, rather than what I have. I've never said that Hollywood has not made movies acknowledging the Allies, but have pointed out some gross historical inaccuracies. I have given examples to refute your allegations of British bragging and how they belittle their allies.
Why should any of us care about approval ratings poll? If you do, perhaps you might start to wonder why your ratings might be low? To get you started, Britain and Australia have high Muslim populations. By European and Australian standards, the USA is right wing and (some think) in danger of becoming a fundamentalist theocracy. So your gratuitous leftist anti-Americanism might be considered justifiable mainstream opinion here. I live in one of the most remote port cities in the world, and yet we know we are a strategic nuclear target because we allow nuclear equipped vessels from other countries to dock, and make their service personnel welcome on shore.
You seem to have a huge chip on your shoulder about the British, as Brian Pelican does about the Canadians. You're taking quite a pop at me, an Australian. If this is how you demonstrate your feelings to your 3 favourite nations is it any wonder that some might think of the Americans as arrogant insensitive, and insecure? I'd add that I don't, but many of my relations, friends & colleagues do.

BTW I can't think why anyone would report your earlier reply to me to the moderators, and have it removed, can you? I'm sure you wouldn't want it removed, so I'll share it out for you :

***"Listen, why can't you say thank you for once? After all it was OUR Hollywood that mentioned your troops in so many movies - and yet you keep criticizing?

Apparently you think a "Thank you" isn't necessary. "***

Like I said, I can't think who would have any kind of motive for reporting it, can you?

To reply : The third sentence of my opening comment of this thread was " Their contribution was vital, and I thank them unreservedly ". I 'll remember to post that in every comment herewith. Do you think I need to repeat the first two sentences as well, or might you have mastered the swipe or the scroll bar by then? I don't particularly see any need to thank YOUR Hollywood., and I don't criticise ALL OF YOUR HOLLYWOOD, just their lies, which you keep avoiding. As for not experiencing hostility from Australians, you obviously need to get out more. If you expressed these views in the way that you do in a pub full of Aussies, the jeering and laughter would haunt you for the rest of your life.

Another standard leftist cliche motivated by wishful thinking.
You might want to take a look at PEW polls. Apparently the leftists wishful thinking about the world hating America is just that... wishful thinking. The USA's approval rating are doing just fine.

"in danger of becoming a fundamentalist theocracy."

You seem to parrot the standard leftist cliches. If and when Australia elects a black president, a fascist putsch would be the result given the current state of racism in Australia.

BTW are there still racist attacks on Indian students going on in Australia. It was headline news worldwide just a few short years ago. 21st century Australia is a country which experienced racist attacks on muslims in beaches and foreign Indian students. You need to ask yourself which country has more in common with a fundamentalist theocracy.

PS: The only part of the world that seems to not like America is the middle-east, but than again they hate the British, Aussies and just about all westerners too.

Sorry but it is you who seems to have a chip on your shoulder by making a mountain out of a molehill about some Hollywood movies.

Please accept my apologies for responding to a comment that you removed because it appeared to be from you but wasn't, your nom de plume having been hacked. It may explain why I enjoy most of your comments but find others a bit bizarre.

"Sorry but it is you who seems to have a chip on your shoulder by making a mountain out of a molehill about some Hollywood movies."

I keep returning to the honesty of Hollywood movies because it is the **topic** of the article and thus the comment thread. You keep avoiding this topic and dropping sour one liners about leftist cliches. Most of my posts seeem to be responding to these one liners. I enjoy your posts, here and elsewhere, but I would rather stay on topic.

Yes, Australians can be racist, no society is perfect. Racism is dying out though,the White Australia policy having been dismantled between 1949 and 73. We never had mass slavery, of free-born africans, preferring cheaper white convicts. Racial tensions that do emerge tend to be in the (self created) ghetto suburbs of Sydney and Melbourne. We have many refugee communities, and your PS comment above is interesting and pertinent: There's a bit of a clue, most of the ME is Muslim, and the Israelis, who aren't, seem to like the USA.

The attacks at the Cronulla beaches were racist, and all Australian. Cronulla is often visited by groups of Muslim and/or Lebanese youth, who provoke other ethnicities by insulting and/or assaulting women who are not dressed in a manner that they consider appropriate. They also insult people who are drinking alcohol. Others consider this behaviour un-australian, in that if you can't have a beer on the beach with your mates, some of whom may be wearing bikinis, what's the point? This section of community felt that the police weren't controlling this properly, and that they needed to take action themselves.

So they demonstrated in December 2005, and there were a few scuffles, but most Lebanese/Muslim/Middle Eastern had the sense to steer clear. Later in the evening, the Lebanese/Muslim/Middle Eastern communities organised in convoys of cars up to 40 strong, fully loaded with people carrying anything from baseball bats to guns, prowled the western suburbs. Mostly they only set things on fire and smashed car windows, but there were a number of stabbings and more beatings. The polic stood aside throughout the evening, as a matter of policy,ironically, rather making the original protestors' point.

There are also regular scraps between the Bra Boys, a surfie gang (who are generally rated second only to the bikie gangs but more enviro friendly) and other gangs, whatever their ethinicity: The Westies, The 5T, The Scorpions, and all the bikies, whatever their ethinicity. There's even a chapter of the Vietnam Vets.

The attacks on and murders of Indian students were despicable, inexcusable and illegal. They came in a spate between 2007 and 20010. They weren't carried out by any mass movment though. In that period there was a population of approx 120,000 mainly in Melbourne and Adelaide. 1,447 had been the victim of crime including assault. There was one murder in 2009 and two in 2010. Ranjodh Singh was murdered during the course of a robbery 29 December 2009 in Griffith, New South Wales. Nitin Garg was murdered 3 January 2010 in Melbourne, I have yet to see any evidence that these were motivated (by race, or any other motive) crimes, persuasive or otherwise. Let's just remind you: You're seriously proposing that 3 murders over 3 years is evidence of a violently racist society. Seriously ?

We have a female atheist Prime Minister (Who is not married to her partner and does not use his name) a female christian Governor-General, and a female Monarch/Head of COE. I have no objection to a PM of another ethnicity, and our Finance Minister, Penny Ying-yen Wong was born in Malaysia to a Chinese father and an Aussie mother. I'm sure it won't be long until we have a non-anglo PM, and a putsch just wouldn't happen. Oh did I mention Penny's lesbian, loud and proud? "Black" may be more diffcult: we never had slaves, and tend not to grade people by skin colour.

At present its unthinkable for a declared atheist to be elected President. In fact, it appears that more americans would vote for a muslim than for an atheist.

I understood your comment "We shall not be so rude as to mention that the USA has a much lower favorability rating in Britain or Australia. " to indicate that you were unhappy with your rating.

Your comment "Another standard leftist cliche motivated by wishful thinking.You might want to take a look at PEW polls. Apparently the leftists wishful thinking about the world hating America is just that... wishful thinking. The USA's approval rating are doing just fine." seems to indicate you're happy with your rating, contradicting your previous comment. If there is a leftist cliche there it is of your making, not mine.

"Why should any of us care about approval ratings polls?"

My statement "in danger of becoming a fundamentalist theocracy." is not a parroting of "the standard leftist cliches. It's an informed opinion. Try googling "American Taliban" for laughs, Kevin Phillips "American Theocracy" for serious reading, and for scary stuff, Ted Haggard, Jesse Helms, Pat Roberston $c ad nauseam.
They stand condemned by their own words. I did not say "I want you to just let a wave of intolerance wash over you. Yes, hate is good.... Our goal is a Christian nation. We have a biblical duty, we are called by God to conquer this country." The sentiments are totally repugnant to me. If they are not to you, try replacing Christian and Bible with Muslim and Koran. Both statements would be equally repugnant to me.

Do they hold any of the levers of power in congress or the executive branch?

Have millions voted for them to give them power to put their views into actions? Have they ever been able to win elections? Pat Robertson was soundly defeated and cannot get elected to any public office. This goes for the others as well.

What you should worry about the extremist parties that are winning elections, not pubilicity craving pundits, shock radio hosts & other entertainers.

What you should worry about is why it was possible for openly extremist racist parties like the Australia first party to win seats in parliament. For God's sake Campbell won 22% of the vote barely 12 years ago.

And you are more worried about entertainers, shock jocks and pundits in America?

Have no idea what you mentioned slavery which was abolished in 1865. Needless to say life for Aborigines in 1865 Australia was not much better than slavery. Also you do realize the Americans inherited slavery from the British who practised it for 2 centuries in their North American colonies? Not to mention the Atlantic slave trade was the life blood of so many British coastal cities at one time. Simply erased from British history books I presume?

I hardly ever hear anyone mention Britain's participation in the Atlantic slave trade and slavery in its colonies for 2 centuries while American slavery from 1776 to 1865 (90 years) is mentioned often. Well we can thank all those Hollywood movies for that. No complaints about dishonesty on that score?

PS: Yes there is a moniker thief lurking around. He has not only stolen my moniker but also Viva, Zorbras and Crammerboys's monikers. If you see some bizarre remarks better to click on the moniker and check the comments history to check.

Not sold to me: We have those old fashioned things called libraries here. Entertainers, shock jocks and pundits? I admit Philips gave up working for the Republican Party to be a pundit: but the others? I acknowledge there are some well researched and documentated(sic) historical books by prominenant(sic) journalists and commentators(sic) about the Christian right in America, and I do understand there are modern tools called "Search Engines".
Thanks again for the heads up on the moniker thief. I thought I'd apologised for that 5 Mar 03:29.

Yes there is a Christian right but you vastly over-estimate their numbers, power and influence.

In a continent of over 300 million diverse people, do you know what percentage would qualify as the the hard right (secular, christian or otherwise). One does not need to be a christian to be an extremist intolerant fundamentalist. Just ask the targets of the Australia's First party.

Obviously as not as big a percentage as Australia which elects people with extremist racist views with bigger votes.

I hope an Australian Kevin Philips one days writes a book about Australia's intolerant fundamentalists (secular, christian or otherwise) which explains the astounding numbers that voted for the Australia First party.

Agree re further insight on Oz/US fundamentalists at each end of spectrum: know thine enemy; hug their belts. QLD'ers have always been a bit rabid.

USA is the only Superpower now USSR divided, China in adolescence, Japan moribund, Germany hamstrung by EU, Brits not what they once were. (Opportunist hypocritical, extortionists to some, paternal administrators and missionaries to others.) That's why interest in the drivers of US politics. An honest question: how many of Congress and Senate openly profess to be anything other than Christian? I just don't know.

Firstly , the British involvement in slavery is covered in great detail in school curricula. That's how I know that the British passed "An Act for the Abolition of the Slave Trade" in 1807, and the RN established the West Africa Squadron in 1808 to patrol the Atlantic, freeing 150,000 Africans over 50 years. Slavery was abolished in the Empire by the Slavery Abolition Act 1833. The British led the world in the abolition of slavery. Washington, Jefferson, Madison and Jackson were all slave holders. Whilst Lincoln may not have owned slaves himself (the records are unclear), his father-in-law and the rest of Mary Todd's family were slave owners and involved in the slave trade. Congress passed the Slave Trade Act in 1794, but slavery was embedded in the constitution and it took the 13th Amendment in 1864 to have any real effect. The 13th was not ratified by all states until the Mississippi legislature voted for it in 1995, but didn't notify the Registry until February 2013. Get that! As of last month all the US slaves are FREE! The 290 years of slavery, by your calculation, is as much a shame on America as it is on Britain. I suspect the reason that much is made of slavery in America is that you had 4 years of bloody civil war mainly because good ole Johnny Reb wanted to keep Uncle Remus in his place. Should you celebrate the fact that you had to fight a war over slavery, and then expect people to ignore it ?

Life for The First People in Australia in 1865 may not have been any better than slavery, but in the main, that wasn't anybody’s fault. Life as nomadic hunter gatherer in Australia's deserts and arid forests was never going to be easy. Yes, that Europeans were settling, so disease, racism, misunderstandings, and legislated murder took their ugly toll. On the whole I'd say our First People have come out of it all rather better than yours. Here are some facts (yes, I know, boring) . In 1868 there were an unknown number of First People in Australia. Credible estimates range from 300,000, to 1.5M. Let's err on the side of genocide and say 3M . Over the 7.7M odd square kilometres of Australia, that's a population density of 0.04 to 0.4, min to max, as you prefer. The European colonists in the East had spread out from the ports, but ther really weren't that many of them. Here are some figures for 1868 and today, for Australia, West Australia, and to give you a comparative indication, Texas and the USA. I know the 1868 figures don't include our First People, I don't know whether the USA & Texas figures include your first people and/or slaves. Sorry, I forgot, the 13th abolished them in 1864, so as free men they must be included.

Bah . TEs spam filter didn't like the numbers. In 1868, the european population of Australian was 1.5 M, at a density of 0.188 people per Km2,WA was 21,700 at 0.08 Today the poplation of Australia is 22.9 M at 2.98 and WA 2.5M at 0.96. This compares to Texas 818 K at 1.2, and 26M at 37.4 . USA with 38.5M at 3.9, an 315.4M at

So yes, on the whole in 1868 I'd rather have been a free hunter gatherer in WA, dancing tales from the Dream time and having a right good meeting of the mob once in a while. Bloody Oath I would. I can't imagine what life would have been like for a newly "emancipated?" slave in the burning rubble of the South, can you?

And now for you greatest furphy, the Australia First Party. Yes Camppell was elected in 1980 as the ***Australian Labour Party *** Member of the House of Representatives for the seat of Kalgoorlie. He was re-elected as an **Independent ** in 1996. He founded Australia First and failed to be re-elected in 1998. The population of Kalgoorlie is ***28,250****. The sum total of the AFPs political power today is one Town Councillor for the St John's Wood Ward of the City of Prospect, in the northern suburbs of Adelaide, and another Councillor in the East Ward for Penrith Council, in the western suburbs of Sydney. But isn't that the beauty of freedom of speech, and democracy? People can vote for whoever they like, and see that those views are represented as they deserve to be? It is for us, with system based on the best of British and the best of American. You do not have to be a whipped member of the two major parties to get a seat in parliament.

So, let's see, where were we. I think we can dismiss your claim of "Astounding numbers that voted for the AFP" . The average size of the 150 Parliamentary electorates is 93,920 electors, and the AFP have never won a seat under that name.

Pat Robertson may have been defeated, but he is not inconsequential. He demanded that 3M people sign a petition for him to run for President, and they did. He came second in the Iowa primary ahead of Bush. His anti semetic and homophobic opinions became an NYT best seller. He is chairman of the CBN. He has issued a number of prophecies, including one in 1976, that the world would end in 1982, and here's a typical quote "I know this is painful for the ladies to hear, but if you get married, you have accepted the headship of a man, your husband. Christ is the head of the household and the husband is the head of the wife, and that's the way it is, period"

Ted Haggard is a prolific author having published 11 books, the quality of which you can guess from the titles: "The Jerusalem Diet" and "Dog Training, Fly Fishing, and Sharing Christ in the 21st Century" being my particular favourites. He was head of "The New Life Church" (a congregation of 14,00) founder of "Association of Life-Giving Churches" and leader of the "National Association of Evangelicals"(30M) He shot to international fame after a homosexual sex worker, Mike Jones, outed him for hypocrisy after paying Jones for sex for three years and being a regular purchaser and user of crystal methamphetamine. Haggard has returned to preaching.

The late Jesse Helms was a 5 term Republican Senator from North Carolina, who served as the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in the late 90's. Which could explain a lot, now I come to think of it. He started his political career with the Democrats, which is partly why I used his name. The Democrats seem to be regarded as some kind of socialist party by some Americans, but they can welcome somone who thinks "Homosexuals are weak, morally sick wretches" and "The New York Times and Washington Post are both infested with homosexuals themselves. Just about every person down there is a homosexual or lesbian."

So, remind me again how these stack up against the astounding numbers of Australians that vote AFP year in, year out?

Can The Economist please ban Brian Pelican? His statements about Canadians, were they made about a race, would be considered hate speech. He does nothing but rile people up with the obnoxious, inaccurate stereotypes he calls opinions.

I've never seen anyone on this site that attacks Americans as consistently and as unfairly as Brian Pelican attacks Canadians. He has been here years spewing out derision and insults any time a story is vaguely Canada-related, and he directs his drivel not at the Canadian government but Canadian people.

If someone uses their account to personally insult Americans, or any country's citizens, with tired,inaccurate, inflammatory stereotypes I think they should be banned too, just as racist commenters are.

Stereotypes? yes. Obnoxious and inaccurate? Not on a bet. For many years I felt that Americans should not be tarred with the same brush of self-delusion and megalomania that their country was guilty of. Now, however, until an individual from the 'land of the home, free of the brave' proves to me that s/he is an exception, I assume that they are, like the country they belong to, arrogant and deserving of the title of 'World's Greatest Terrorist Threat'. You make me ill by your very existence.

Most countries have their own version of history, where their own triumphs are magnified and their failures ignored. (My school history lessons were largely about how Britain won World War 2, with help from America and Russia largely ignored).

Holywood sells these to Americans - but if Holywood were based in any other country we would probably see an equal slanting of reality - just biased towards making its customers feel good about themselves.

What I find interesting is that Holywood is increasinly including 'international' heroic characters in its movies - to widen its appeal (and revenues derived from) abroad.

Very interesting background story. The truth is more sensational than the fiction. It is indeed a triumph of international collaboration for a worthy cause, now ends up to be a way to glorify individual heroism.

Very interesting background story. The truth is more sensational than the fiction. It is indeed a triumph of international collaboration for a worthy cause, now ends up a way to glorify individual heroism.

Gawd bless canada.
Canada never takes the blame for anything it does. Being in the shadow of the economic colossus to the south, America is an easy target.
"the pianist" was based on a true story but introduced a certain amount of fiction. canadians didn't seem to have a problem with that (and others). Why?
Because there was no opportunity to whine and pretend they were due any glory.
What a self serving nation of navel gazers.
As canadians man the retail desks and clean the floors of American branches which dominate Canada's industry. And assemble American cars according to instructions from Detroit.

I have to wonder, given the current tense climate between Iran and the US, how Iranians (in the US and Iran) feel about this film. Hollywood is never averse to simplifying complex situations into good-and-evil binaries, but this seems like inappropriate timing. The combination of subject matter and lack of prominent Iranian actors is particularly unsettling to me at a time when I think we should all be striving to form a more nuanced understanding of Iran's history, culture, and people. Given that this is something I don't know enough about, I would have preferred to see this article touch on the reception of the film in a broader context.

History only exists by virtue of our knowledge of it and our knowledge of history is predicated upon by what we read, but what we might have read may have been written or distorted by historians who interpreted events the way they had wanted them to be and not as events actually were – perhaps to suit the politics of the time or merely repeated each other’s prejudices. To have a full grasp of history, and especially history that may be an affront to established historical opinion, one has to disregard left-winged Cambridge, Oxford and Harvard and start from square one. Iranians don't even know their own history, once the Aryans, whatever culture there was, Islam has well and truly wiped out, and people thought controlled. The good news is; the true blooded Persians will rise up and topple the ayatollahs and take down the mosques and the people will become secular once more or at least no longer bound by monastic restrictions.

I had the privilege several years ago of sitting beside Ken Taylor on a New York- Toronto Air Canada flight.
I have worked with diplomats in Central and Eastern Europe. Ken Taylor was and a very professional diplomat and I am saddneed that the movie "Argo" minimized what Canada and other nations did to help the diplomsts and made the suggestion that the Canadians were whining that they wanted the Americans out.
As every diplomat and carpenter knows, one should "always measure twice and cut once". By careful planning and having good back-up plans, the Canadians (with CIA help) successfully exfiltrated the Americans without fuss or bother.
The Canadians knew their way around Tehran; the CIA were fresh on the ground.
It was only after the Canadian Embassy was closed did the news get out of what the Canadians had done. Thank you for pointing out there was no airplane chase (perhaps the scene was borrowed from or inspired by novelist Tom Clancy's "Cardinal of the Kremlin").
Perhaps Ben Affleck now owes apologies to the New Zealanders, Australians and Tom Clancy.

Oh for God's sake. If the shoe had been on the other foot, and Americans helped Canadians get out of the country, they would have readily done it. And they would not have whined about a Canadian film which didn't exactly cover what the Americans had done.

Most likely, Americans wouldn't have viewed the Canadian film anyway. When it comes to foreigners, Americans look to see what the movers & shakers of the world do - like Britain, France, Germany, Japan and other Asian nations.

I'm not one for ad hominem arguments, but this is the second mind-numbingly stupid, and discriminatory, comment you've made about Canadians. That you feel emboldened to post such ridiculous thoughts on the website on one of the wolds premier political magazines, is hard to understand.

Indeed, you are the one who comes across as a self-serving navel gazer, perhaps with an axe to grind, spouting flap and fuss. The type of comments you are making simply display to all that you lack basic critical thinking skills.

I'm not one for ad hominem arguments, but this is the second mind-numbingly stupid, and discriminatory, comment you've made about Canadians. That you feel emboldened to post such ridiculous thoughts on the website on one of the wolds premier political magazines, is hard to understand.

Indeed, you are the one who comes across as a self-serving navel gazer, perhaps with an axe to grind, spouting flap and fuss. The type of comments you are making simply display to all that you lack basic critical thinking skills.

I'm not one for ad hominem arguments, but this is the second mind-numbingly stupid, and discriminatory, comment you've made about Canadians. That you feel emboldened to post such ridiculous thoughts on the website on one of the wolds premier political magazines, is hard to understand.

Indeed, you are the one who comes across as a self-serving navel gazer, perhaps with an axe to grind, spouting flap and fuss. The type of comments you are making simply display to all that you lack basic critical thinking skills.

Thank you for your sensible approach.
If regular Canadians concentrated on what Canada could do to further its influence on the world (instead of whining about what part they played in helping a friend out), they would make more of a splash on the world scene
Do Canadians mimimize the massive role America plays in Canada's economy (like Americans buy 75% of Canada's exports, for one thing).
Yes.
Do Americans care?
No
Do Americans care about the view the Brits espouse of America's major influence in winning WW2?
No.
The sign of a grown up nation.

I agree with what you express, and if it was a depiction of a true story, they should have kept the facts straight. I'm saying it is a movie, because it is...and yes, they could have had a sense of remaining true to the facts. But at the end...it is a movie. There are other ways to find out what the real facts are, I don't think a movie is one.

Canada was the U.S's largest trading PARTNER up to last year when they were overtaken by PRC (China). Do most Americans care or even know? I agree. No, they do not! But that's nothing to be proud of; that's not "grown up". That's just uncaring ignorance.

So it would be fine by you if The Sands of Iwo Jima were to be remade in the UK, starring Daniel Craig as a tough as nails Sergeant in the Black Watch, witnessing the raising of the Saltire on Mount Suribachi by men in kilts?